Not so much a problem of "finding funding" perhaps (after all, 4 years of PAS = only one Silbury tunnel!) more of justifying funding. £40 per find - some of them grotty old buckles - is a lot to justify to the taxpayer. If they happen to use my tax for PAS then I'm not sure I think database pictures of a small pile of grotty buckles is what I wanted them to use it for. A bigger pile, maybe.
On that basis I think a "bigger PAS" is definitely not on the cards. More finds and a consequent lower unit cost per find is the only likely ambition. That or no PAS.
 Reply | with quote | Posted by nigelswift
4th August 2005ce
15:24 |
Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Jane, Jul 27, 2005, 22:13)- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Ishmael, Jul 27, 2005, 22:23)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Pilgrim, Jul 27, 2005, 22:59)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (nigelswift, Jul 28, 2005, 02:24)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Cheshireman, Aug 01, 2005, 13:20)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (BrigantesNation, Aug 01, 2005, 13:30)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (nigelswift, Aug 01, 2005, 13:38)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (FourWinds, Aug 01, 2005, 13:39)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (juamei, Aug 01, 2005, 14:17)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Pilgrim, Aug 01, 2005, 19:40)
- How about this? (FourWinds, Aug 01, 2005, 18:03)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (FourWinds, Aug 03, 2005, 22:29)
|
|
Head To Head 
Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Pilgrim)